|
|
Post by Giggity on Sept 7, 2014 20:41:18 GMT 1
Get on with your job Powell and stop crying the poor tale. Poor tale....stop being so flippant..... The only black manager in the football league, gives opinion on the lack of black football managers to a journalist and he's not getting on with his job.  How about YOU stop with the infantile gifs and avatars and get on with adulthood. Maybe his pals should lower their ambitions and apply for a job at their level (i.e. League 2) rather than attempting to play the race card. How about YOU stop being a yoghurt knitter and open your eyes. |
|
|
|
Post by Giggity on Sept 7, 2014 20:43:16 GMT 1
Nice to see us in the media....good PR for HTAFC Be careful what you wish for. We will be branded as racists by the likes of Jason Roberts, Stan Collymore, Paul Ince, Garth Crooks etc when we sack him. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2014 21:09:14 GMT 1
|
|
|
|
Post by hypotenuse on Sept 7, 2014 21:11:24 GMT 1
There is no difference between discrimination and positive discrimination. they are the same thing- discrimination. To suggest that discriminating against Black people is wrong, but then put forward discriminating against white people is ridiculous. Black people, as a minority, have been campaigning for decades for equality- to be treated the same regardless of skin colour. So for any of them now to want to be treated differently because of their skin colour ( now that it goes in their favour) is a disgrace IMO and a case of gross hypocrisy. This is a complete misrepresentation of Terrier5. As stated by me earlier, what is required is equality of opportunity. If you were interviewing for a job in a room which was inaccessible to a wheelchair user, what do you do? Move the interview to a different room so that everyone has the opportunity to be interviewed or say "tough luck mate - you need to get a narrower wheelchair" |
|
|
|
Post by Chips Longhorn on Sept 7, 2014 21:14:49 GMT 1
Oh dear Giggity I thought you had turned the corner with your excellent offtopic threads. Looks like you've gone back to playing the knob
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2014 21:16:56 GMT 1
I work for a global player Oti? We all work for Oti. |
|
|
|
Post by Captainslapper on Sept 8, 2014 1:10:57 GMT 1
There is no difference between discrimination and positive discrimination. they are the same thing- discrimination. To suggest that discriminating against Black people is wrong, but then put forward discriminating against white people is ridiculous. Black people, as a minority, have been campaigning for decades for equality- to be treated the same regardless of skin colour. So for any of them now to want to be treated differently because of their skin colour ( now that it goes in their favour) is a disgrace IMO and a case of gross hypocrisy. This is a complete misrepresentation of Terrier5. As stated by me earlier, what is required is equality of opportunity. If you were interviewing for a job in a room which was inaccessible to a wheelchair user, what do you do? Move the interview to a different room so that everyone has the opportunity to be interviewed or say "tough luck mate - you need to get a narrower wheelchair" Im not trying to give a representation of what terrier 5 said. It was just what i think about it. You say you want equality of opportunity and then you want people to be favoured because of their skin colour. Which is it you want? Equality or discrimination? Im yet to hear of a club advertising for a manager and adding that black candidates need not apply, so Im not sure your analogy works. Positive discrimination is just discrimination. Thats all it is. I can't believe theres a chairman in the football league who wouldn't happily employ a little green 8 armed alien as the manager if he thought hed get the club into the premiership. It wouldn't surprise me if there'd have been a racial issue from chairman 30 years ago as back then football chairman all seemed like stuffy old men in an old boys network. But the vast majority of club owners now are young, extremely wealthy ,forward thinking businessmen who've made their fortunes opperating in the modern world. I can't see that many of them at all would give a shit if the best candidate for a job was black. The number of black managers will grow in time naturally without any discrimination to put them there, just like the number of black players did. The only reason why Powells the only black manager just now is that all the others have been so poor they haven't lasted long and because of that haven't been the best option for any other clubs either , otherwise there'd be quite a few. |
|
|
|
Post by Captainslapper on Sept 8, 2014 8:53:30 GMT 1
Forgot Hughton. Hes been a good manager and won't be out of the game for long.
|
|
|
|
Post by bluedogs, Esq. on Sept 8, 2014 9:11:37 GMT 1
Forgot Hughton. Hes been a good manager and won't be out of the game for long. I always thought Tigana did a good job at Fulham, and he was unlucky not to find another premier league club willing to give him a chance |
|
terrier5
Tom Cowan Terrier
[M0:5]
Posts: 705
|
Post by terrier5 on Sept 8, 2014 9:46:15 GMT 1
'Playing the race card' is an expression that sets my teeth on edge. It's often used in a very blinkered way simply to bat away any suggestion of racism without having to so much as think about the issue. My daughter (12) not long ago, came home upset as some of the older kids had been teasing her on the bus, throwing stuff at her (rolled up bits of paper rather than half bricks) etc and claimed this was because she's the only non - white (she's mixed and not obviously half Caribbean at all) kid on the bus. I said that probably wasn't the case and if she could laugh it off, next week they'd pick on someone else. Playing the race card? Two years ago she was kicked , punched & sworn at by one dysfunctional little *** at primary school who called her a "fucking mars bar". Growing up is hard enough at the best of times (twats like giggity are still trying) and when she tries to understand why so & so has stopped talking to her (you know how they are), that incident has to be one of her references. Playing the race card? Maybe , maybe not. You might think Paul Ince is a crap manager but it's very hard sometimes for him to know why folk don't like him... because he will undoubtedly have been on the receiving end of racism at times in his life. Don't know much about the bloke but I'll bet anyone £1 on that. Crap managers get jobs all the time. Why not him!!  Sorry for sharing but I get annoyed when people play the old "playing the race card" card. Last post on the subject. I don't mind a debate with the likes of the Captain as I'll get a reasoned one but with some on this board, I'm wasting my time, and the dog's on at me to go on a walk. |
|
|
|
Post by bro600 on Sept 8, 2014 11:07:12 GMT 1
Is this not just a case of another journalist under pressure to create something for the Mirrors internet page? I see he used to write for The Examiner as well so you can understand why he dug this up. Am i the only one who can't see in the story Chris Powell actually asking for The Rooney Law to be used in our game? I may be wrong but i actually see him telling people to use himself, Ince, and Houghton as examples and go out and get themselves proper qualified and well prepared for the job and even the O.P states that he believes people should be given jobs "on merit". Chris Powell seems like a football person who stands up for the underdog generally and this may be why he got the role within the PFA.. His piece on money in football is a good read and gives you an insight into where he might be coming from when he say's the authorities need to do their bit. www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1270333/Overpaid-touch-irresponsible-PFA-chairman-Chris-Powell-gives-damning-verdict-worst-todays-millionaire-footballers.html |
|
|
|
Post by Chips Longhorn on Sept 8, 2014 11:47:39 GMT 1
Is this not just a case of another journalist under pressure to create something for the Mirrors internet page? I see he used to write for The Examiner as well so you can understand why he dug this up. Am i the only one who can't see in the story Chris Powell actually asking for The Rooney Law to be used in our game? I may be wrong but i actually see him telling people to use himself, Ince, and Houghton as examples and go out and get themselves proper qualified and well prepared for the job and even the O.P states that he believes people should be given jobs "on merit". Chris Powell seems like a football person who stands up for the underdog generally and this may be why he got the role within the PFA.. His piece on money in football is a good read and gives you an insight into where he might be coming from when he say's the authorities need to do their bit. www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1270333/Overpaid-touch-irresponsible-PFA-chairman-Chris-Powell-gives-damning-verdict-worst-todays-millionaire-footballers.htmlThe fact that people might not have looked beyond the OPs headline occurred to me as soon as Giggity got involved |
|
|
|
Post by thrice on Sept 8, 2014 12:17:41 GMT 1
The Rooney Rule contains great simple principles that can be applied when making any appointment in any industry.
it just should not be applied along the lines of race, religion, creed, colour, gender or any other "discriminatory" practices.
|
|
|
|
Post by OldRastrickian on Sept 8, 2014 12:29:02 GMT 1
'Playing the race card' is an expression that sets my teeth on edge. It's often used in a very blinkered way simply to bat away any suggestion of racism without having to so much as think about the issue. My daughter (12) not long ago, came home upset as some of the older kids had been teasing her on the bus, throwing stuff at her (rolled up bits of paper rather than half bricks) etc and claimed this was because she's the only non - white (she's mixed and not obviously half Caribbean at all) kid on the bus. I said that probably wasn't the case and if she could laugh it off, next week they'd pick on someone else. Playing the race card? Two years ago she was kicked , punched & sworn at by one dysfunctional little *** at primary school who called her a "fucking mars bar". Growing up is hard enough at the best of times (twats like giggity are still trying) and when she tries to understand why so & so has stopped talking to her (you know how they are), that incident has to be one of her references. Playing the race card? Maybe , maybe not. You might think Paul Ince is a crap manager but it's very hard sometimes for him to know why folk don't like him... because he will undoubtedly have been on the receiving end of racism at times in his life. Don't know much about the bloke but I'll bet anyone £1 on that. Crap managers get jobs all the time. Why not him!! Sorry for sharing but I get annoyed when people play the old "playing the race card" card. Last post on the subject. I don't mind a debate with the likes of the Captain as I'll get a reasoned one but with some on this board, I'm wasting my time, and the dog's on at me to go on a walk. But the race card, like the sexual discrimination card, is continually played, is it not? I would guess it crops up in employment tribunals on a near-daily basis. And your daughter's "suffering" is surely little different from that of other children, for a whole host of reasons....short fat boy, ugly girl, thick girl, boy useless at sport, etc, etc, etc. For some reason, only a select list of discriminations have been criminalised......eg calling someone black "n*gger", in a society where blackness is widespread, is a hate crime......calling an ugly person "ugly", in a society where ugliness is a real handicap, isn't a crime at all. Telling someone at a job interview they haven't got the job solely because they're muslim, another crime......telling someone they haven't got the job because they're ugly (they won't be surprised, because all the evidence suggests employers discriminate in favour of the better-looking candidate) isn't. Surely, either all forms of discrimination should be criminalised (and "Orwellian" wouldn't even begin to describe such a society), or none. I opt for the latter. I have a simple test..imagine, for example, a Pakistani-heritage muslim, with a little business, needs to replace his one member of staff (with whom he works in close proximity, 5 days/week). The only person who applies is a white, mincing, lisping homosexual....adequately qualified to do the job, but anathema to the employer. Why shouldn't that employer be legally entitled to say " I couldn't spend time in the company of someone like you even if my life depended on it.....bugger off!" |
|
|
|
Post by Captainslapper on Sept 8, 2014 12:48:57 GMT 1
Personally i don't see how the Rooney rule would work even if it was introduced.
By its very nature, it implies that club owners and CEOs are racist- ie- that they are not even considering candidates if they are black.
If there was such an owner, then being forced to interview a black candidate isn't going to make any difference to him- he isn't going to appoint a black manager whatever.
For all the owners who aren't racist ( which IMO will be practically all of them) , then they're just going to feel insulted as they've effectively been labelled racist. They'll then be forced to interview a candidate who may well have applied for the job but who they didn't consider good enough to interview. Are they really then likely to suddenly change their mind? can't see it myself. If the guy wasn't good enough to even get an interview, then hes going to have to be astonishingly good to end up getting the job!
|
|
|
|
Post by thrice on Sept 8, 2014 12:58:31 GMT 1
Personally i don't see how the Rooney rule would work even if it was introduced. By its very nature, it implies that club owners and CEOs are racist- ie- that they are not even considering candidates if they are black. If there was such an owner, then being forced to interview a black candidate isn't going to make any difference to him- he isn't going to appoint a black manager whatever. For all the owners who aren't racist ( which IMO will be practically all of them) , then they're just going to feel insulted as they've effectively been labelled racist. They'll then be forced to interview a candidate who may well have applied for the job but who they didn't consider good enough to interview. Are they really then likely to suddenly change their mind? can't see it myself. If the guy wasn't good enough to even get an interview, then hes going to have to be astonishingly good to end up getting the job! The phenomenon of the Rooney rule is that although people get interviewed who an organisation might have absolutely no intention of employing they sometimes make such an impression that when the next appointment is made they have played themselves into a better position. I believe that this is how the rule has played out in the US. The candidates have not necessarily been appointed at the first time of asking but come the next appointment they have sometimes left a good enough impression to be seriously considered/appointed, or even put forward for other positions. |
|
|
|
Post by Marco4 on Sept 8, 2014 13:02:54 GMT 1
As seemingly happened (though Rooney himself denies it) with Mike Tomlin.
|
|
|
|
Post by Captainslapper on Sept 8, 2014 13:17:26 GMT 1
Personally i don't see how the Rooney rule would work even if it was introduced. By its very nature, it implies that club owners and CEOs are racist- ie- that they are not even considering candidates if they are black. If there was such an owner, then being forced to interview a black candidate isn't going to make any difference to him- he isn't going to appoint a black manager whatever. For all the owners who aren't racist ( which IMO will be practically all of them) , then they're just going to feel insulted as they've effectively been labelled racist. They'll then be forced to interview a candidate who may well have applied for the job but who they didn't consider good enough to interview. Are they really then likely to suddenly change their mind? can't see it myself. If the guy wasn't good enough to even get an interview, then hes going to have to be astonishingly good to end up getting the job! The phenomenon of the Rooney rule is that although people get interviewed who an organisation might have absolutely no intention of employing they sometimes make such an impression that when the next appointment is made they have played themselves into a better position. I believe that this is how the rule has played out in the US. The candidates have not necessarily been appointed at the first time of asking but come the next appointment they have sometimes left a good enough impression to be seriously considered/appointed, or even put forward for other positions. Interesting. I suppose the obvious problem with that is that ANY failed candidate actually given the chance to interview might make such a positive impression in that way. So, is it fair that only black ones get that chance? What about the failed white candidate who knows if he had the chance to be interviewed that hed knock their socks off ? He sees a black guy getting that chance but he doesn't because the colour of his skin isn't right. IMO, it is discrimination based on race. Or racism basically. |
|
|
|
Post by thrice on Sept 8, 2014 13:38:20 GMT 1
The phenomenon of the Rooney rule is that although people get interviewed who an organisation might have absolutely no intention of employing they sometimes make such an impression that when the next appointment is made they have played themselves into a better position. I believe that this is how the rule has played out in the US. The candidates have not necessarily been appointed at the first time of asking but come the next appointment they have sometimes left a good enough impression to be seriously considered/appointed, or even put forward for other positions. Interesting. I suppose the obvious problem with that is that ANY failed candidate actually given the chance to interview might make such a positive impression in that way. So, is it fair that only black ones get that chance? What about the failed white candidate who knows if he had the chance to be interviewed that hed knock their socks off ? He sees a black guy getting that chance but he doesn't because the colour of his skin isn't right. IMO, it is discrimination based on race. Or racism basically. I agree the principle of greater opportunity should be open to all. This is the kind of rule that organisations should really be employing for themselves without any compulsion & without the "discriminatory" aspect allied. The benefit of interviewing those who you have no intention of employing (at that time) does appear to have certain merit though. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2014 14:07:40 GMT 1
The fact that Powell uses Paul Ince as an example to try and prove that there are good, unemployed black managers out there, actually proves precisely the opposite.
If there were even two or three other black managers who were capable of managing at league level, Ince's name would be nowhere on that article, as the man is literally the walking definition of incompetence, and that is nothing to do with his skin colour, but everything to do with the reputation he has built for himself.
If Powell and others who share a similar view want to see more black managers in the game, then perhaps they should produce 'start-up' schemes, target black coaches at grass roots level and give them all the tools they need to progress in the game.
That is the approach that should be taken, because giving potential candidates a 'free pass' simply because of their skin colour, is downright disgraceful, and an insult to the plethora of League managers who have worked and worked to get to where they are today.
It's about time that those Black coaches who ask "Why can't I become a league manager? What are the authorities doing to help me?", stopped asking that question, and instead asked "what can I do to help myself? How do I strengthen my prospects as a manager?", because it's naff all to do with their skin colour, and everything to do with the fact that they just aren't good enough.
|
|
|
|
Post by kes on Sept 8, 2014 14:56:40 GMT 1
Basically ever journalist that ever speaks to him brings up the fact he is black and ask him about the number of black coaches in the game then go ahead with a "Powell wants more black managers " article.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2014 16:17:55 GMT 1
Just seen on SSN that Powel is on the Sunday Supplement show in Sky Sports this morning talking about lack of black managers in football. If I employed someone and paid them 100-150k per year to mange a football team, I'm not sure how I would feel about them spending a significant amount of energy and time searching for racism. |
|
|
|
Post by hypotenuse on Sept 8, 2014 18:05:41 GMT 1
My goodness - some of the comments on here are mighty depressing. One positive - at least I now understand why the bigots and misogynists calling themselves UKIP manage to cobble together so many votes
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2014 18:18:49 GMT 1
there should be more black managers. colour of skin shouldn't be an obstacle - if they are good enough.
|
|
|
|
Post by Giggity on Sept 8, 2014 19:00:03 GMT 1
My point being is that too many people these days are ready to blame anyone but themselves for their own failure. Overlooking their own incompetence for an excuse should not be encouraged.
|
|
|
|
Post by Giggity on Sept 8, 2014 19:04:06 GMT 1
'Playing the race card' is an expression that sets my teeth on edge. It's often used in a very blinkered way simply to bat away any suggestion of racism without having to so much as think about the issue. My daughter (12) not long ago, came home upset as some of the older kids had been teasing her on the bus, throwing stuff at her (rolled up bits of paper rather than half bricks) etc and claimed this was because she's the only non - white (she's mixed and not obviously half Caribbean at all) kid on the bus. I said that probably wasn't the case and if she could laugh it off, next week they'd pick on someone else. Playing the race card? Two years ago she was kicked , punched & sworn at by one dysfunctional little *** at primary school who called her a "fucking mars bar". Growing up is hard enough at the best of times (twats like giggity are still trying) and when she tries to understand why so & so has stopped talking to her (you know how they are), that incident has to be one of her references. Playing the race card? Maybe , maybe not. You might think Paul Ince is a crap manager but it's very hard sometimes for him to know why folk don't like him... because he will undoubtedly have been on the receiving end of racism at times in his life. Don't know much about the bloke but I'll bet anyone £1 on that. Crap managers get jobs all the time. Why not him!! Sorry for sharing but I get annoyed when people play the old "playing the race card" card. Last post on the subject. I don't mind a debate with the likes of the Captain as I'll get a reasoned one but with some on this board, I'm wasting my time, and the dog's on at me to go on a walk. Jesus christ. Your daughter being racially abused has nothing to do with the point I was making. Learn to read. |
|
|
|
Post by Headless Chicken on Sept 8, 2014 19:22:25 GMT 1
Personally i don't see how the Rooney rule would work even if it was introduced. By its very nature, it implies that club owners and CEOs are racist- ie- that they are not even considering candidates if they are black. If there was such an owner, then being forced to interview a black candidate isn't going to make any difference to him- he isn't going to appoint a black manager whatever. For all the owners who aren't racist ( which IMO will be practically all of them) , then they're just going to feel insulted as they've effectively been labelled racist. They'll then be forced to interview a candidate who may well have applied for the job but who they didn't consider good enough to interview. Are they really then likely to suddenly change their mind? can't see it myself. If the guy wasn't good enough to even get an interview, then hes going to have to be astonishingly good to end up getting the job! That is a fair point! However, I don't think it's generally aimed at overtly racist biggots (or equivalent), rather those who may have formed preconceptions. |
|
|
|
Post by Captainslapper on Sept 8, 2014 19:28:48 GMT 1
My goodness - some of the comments on here are mighty depressing. One positive - at least I now understand why the bigots and misogynists calling themselves UKIP manage to cobble together so many votes what a stupid comment. I mean really, really stupid. The debate and comments obviously sail way over your head. It's a common problem idiots like yourself have whenever theres any kind of discussion of this nature. |
|
|
|
Post by Captainslapper on Sept 8, 2014 19:31:04 GMT 1
Personally i don't see how the Rooney rule would work even if it was introduced. By its very nature, it implies that club owners and CEOs are racist- ie- that they are not even considering candidates if they are black. If there was such an owner, then being forced to interview a black candidate isn't going to make any difference to him- he isn't going to appoint a black manager whatever. For all the owners who aren't racist ( which IMO will be practically all of them) , then they're just going to feel insulted as they've effectively been labelled racist. They'll then be forced to interview a candidate who may well have applied for the job but who they didn't consider good enough to interview. Are they really then likely to suddenly change their mind? can't see it myself. If the guy wasn't good enough to even get an interview, then hes going to have to be astonishingly good to end up getting the job! That is a fair point! However, I don't think it's generally aimed at overtly racist biggots (or equivalent), rather those who may have formed preconceptions. Is there a difference though? I mean if someone has such a preconception that a guy won't be a good manager because hes black, then that pretty much makes him overtly racist surely? |
|
|
|
Post by Headless Chicken on Sept 8, 2014 19:47:32 GMT 1
The fact that Powell uses Paul Ince as an example to try and prove that there are good, unemployed black managers out there, actually proves precisely the opposite. If there were even two or three other black managers who were capable of managing at league level, Ince's name would be nowhere on that article, as the man is literally the walking definition of incompetence, and that is nothing to do with his skin colour, but everything to do with the reputation he has built for himself. If Powell and others who share a similar view want to see more black managers in the game, then perhaps they should produce 'start-up' schemes, target black coaches at grass roots level and give them all the tools they need to progress in the game. That is the approach that should be taken, because giving potential candidates a 'free pass' simply because of their skin colour, is downright disgraceful, and an insult to the plethora of League managers who have worked and worked to get to where they are today. It's about time that those Black coaches who ask "Why can't I become a league manager? What are the authorities doing to help me?", stopped asking that question, and instead asked "what can I do to help myself? How do I strengthen my prospects as a manager?", because it's naff all to do with their skin colour, and everything to do with the fact that they just aren't good enough. I can't say I'm overly keen on Ince, but he gets an unfair amount of stick if you ask me. Unlike most flakey British players he broadened his horizons by going abroad and made a fist of it, and subsequently started from the bottom in his managerial career, doing pretty well with MK and Macclesfield. It did go south and I'm not aware of the jobs Ince is supposedly applying for (i.e. is he aiming too high), but there are certainly numerous white managers with crapper credentials constantly getting jobs. I've actually gone almost 360 on this debate (happened about two months ago, not during this thread!) but agree the race card is played by some and the Black Lawyer's Society are infuriating, but there are still preconceptions that do disadvantage minorities. I also agree the stats around this specific example are misleading, because it's only in more recent times that black players make up such a large proportion of players. |
|
